Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
It does look like a correct change, but what I am worried from glibc
standpoint is if it would require a compatibility implementation
(potentially mapping RE_SYNTAX_{E}GREP to old definition on compat symbol).
I doubt whether that would be needed (or, as Zack writes, h
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Adhemerval Zanella
wrote:
> The glibc testfile, bug-regex28.c, is related to BZ#3957 [1], which is not
> strictly related to RE_SYNTAX_{E}GREP definition. On gnulib side the change
> was done somewhat recently (2015) by 5a5a9388e.
>
> It does look like a correct c
